PICA200 is an OpenGL ES1.1 chip featuring a set of proprietary extensions that enable a variety of features that one might normally implement via ES2.0 shaders through a fixed hardware pipeline.

The PICA200 scales with up to four pipelines and processes from up to four programmable vertex units. The 3D core, using their proprietary graphics technology named MAESTRO-2G, the second generation of the Maestro design, implements custom graphics algorithms as hardware for enabling a set of shading features that include per-vertex sub-surface scattering, bidirectional reflectance distribution function, cook-torrance, polygon subdivision, and soft shadowing. Their image post-processing module, the PICA-FBM frame buffer management, can polish the image with anti-aliasing and a set of other 2D functions and can actually be licensed independently as a core for 2D-only devices. In either case, the PICA-FBM can be extended with a PICA-VG vector graphics module.

The more I read up, the more it seems like a pretty good fit for Nintendo. All those extra capabilities above and beyond the base OpenGL ES 1.1 just wouldn't be used by any other device as they'd just go with a standard OpenGL ES 1.1 driver to maintain compatibility. However since these features are hardwired it should be capable of the sort of efficiency Nintendo was looking for and as its already capable of most of the nice effects you'd get from a full OpenGL ES 2.0 in reality you're not losing too much if developers are able to directly exploit these features.

Since it takes so long to downlaod currently, I also hosted Futuremark's test/demo/benchmark of the hardware at Youtube, here:

The demo is pretty impressive, packed with normal and specular maps (as seen in many 3DS games already), sports some really nice soft shadowing (though its lacking self shadowing as seen in many 3DS games).

The PICA200 scales with up to four pipelines and processes from up to four programmable vertex units. The 3D core, using their proprietary graphics technology named MAESTRO-2G, the second generation of the Maestro design, implements custom graphics algorithms as hardware for enabling a set of shading features that include per-vertex sub-surface scattering, bidirectional reflectance distribution function, cook-torrance, polygon subdivision, and soft shadowing. Their image post-processing module, the PICA-FBM frame buffer management, can polish the image with anti-aliasing and a set of other 2D functions and can actually be licensed independently as a core for 2D-only devices. In either case, the PICA-FBM can be extended with a PICA-VG vector graphics module.

So, looking at the details of this chip, it's a completely unsurprising fit with how Nintendo do things: it implements a variety of fairly modern effects directly via a fixed pipeline instead of allowing full programmable shaders, which in turn means it can deliver some significant portion of the graphical output of an ES2.0 chip but with noticeably lower power consumption.

So, looking at the details of this chip, it's a completely unsurprising fit with how Nintendo do things: it implements a variety of fairly modern effects directly via a fixed pipeline instead of allowing full programmable shaders, which in turn means it can deliver some significant portion of the graphical output of an ES2.0 chip but with noticeably lower power consumption.

It ought to be capable of most modern 3D "effects" and to be able to push a decent amount of power, but it's dependent on what specifically they went with. "PICA200" isn't a specific GPU, it's a line/group of GPUs with a specific architecture, so the details of the exact throughput are still not known to us, I believe.

Originally Posted by GDGF

I would also like to know how this compares to TEV.

(the shader functions I mean)

If I understand correctly, it should be a lot more developer-friendly, at least. TEV was pretty powerful but required you to understand a unique way of setting up and programming your effects that wasn't used anywhere else (which meant most people didn't bother.) This is sort of the opposite; it pre-defines most of the effects you'd ever want to use for you and you just activate them via the provided API (but at a loss of flexibility -- you can't create your own unique pixel-shader effects.)

So, looking at the details of this chip, it's a completely unsurprising fit with how Nintendo do things: it implements a variety of fairly modern effects directly via a fixed pipeline instead of allowing full programmable shaders, which in turn means it can deliver some significant portion of the graphical output of an ES2.0 chip but with noticeably lower power consumption.

Well, the difference is that TEV is more flexible theoretically but a pain in the ass to use, whereas this isn't particularly flexible at all but it should be extremely easy for devs to take advantage of.

Originally Posted by markot

I hope it gets nice battery life. 10hour min >_<!

Let me put it this way: this is, as best as I understand, probably about the best choice (from a graphical-power perspective) Nintendo could have made if their first priority was to maintain a good battery life.

It ought to be capable of most modern 3D "effects" and to be able to push a decent amount of power, but it's dependent on what specifically they went with. "PICA200" isn't a specific GPU, it's a line/group of GPUs with a specific architecture, so the details of the exact throughput are still not known to us, I believe.

If I understand correctly, it should be a lot more developer-friendly, at least. TEV was pretty powerful but required you to understand a unique way of setting up and programming your effects that wasn't used anywhere else (which meant most people didn't bother.) This is sort of the opposite; it pre-defines most of the effects you'd ever want to use for you and you just activate them via the provided API (but at a loss of flexibility -- you can't create your own unique pixel-shader effects.)

I wonder which games made use of TEV best... My guess is the two Rogue Squadrons, FF Crystal Chronicles, Star Fox Adventures and perhaps Pikmin 1/2 as well. I believe Renderware used it well in some games too.

brain_stew, any thoughts as to the polygon-pushing potential of this chip family and where it might range in comparison to other devices? We are rapidly depleting my ability to meaningfully apply my meager knowledge of graphics hardware to answering questions about this thing. :lol

Knowing how much video memory and total memory along with cache sizes will also help a great deal in knowing what the 3DS can do performance wise. High clock-speed alone won't matter if there are severe bottlenecks elsewhere.